# New Half Robusto: Monte Petite Edmundo



## cohibaguy (Feb 22, 2006)

Hi guys...

Looks like Monte is following the HdM trail and recently came up with its own half robusto. Anyone has had any experience with this one?

cohibaguy


----------



## cigarflip (Jul 4, 2004)

cohibaguy said:


> Hi guys...
> 
> Looks like Monte is following the HdM trail and recently came up with its own half robusto. Anyone has had any experience with this one?
> 
> cohibaguy


yep...smoked one Saturday and pitched it after an inch.


----------



## zemekone (Aug 1, 2004)

cigarflip said:


> yep...smoked one Saturday and pitched it after an inch.


i think i smoked mine inch and 1 half and pitched it...


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

Wow, must be pretty bad!!


----------



## burninator (Jul 11, 2006)

Are these bad, or is it just that they're still to young to be enjoyable?


----------



## LiteHedded (Apr 10, 2005)

dog rockets?


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

cigarflip said:


> yep...smoked one Saturday and pitched it after an inch.


Great news. I can't wait till later on in the week, when someone I know receives 2 boxes of these.


----------



## cigarflip (Jul 4, 2004)

burninator said:


> Are these bad, or is it just that they're still to young to be enjoyable?


Very young...a very good friend opened a box and we all tried it. They probably need 10 years of aging.


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

cigarflip said:


> Very young...a very good friend opened a box and we all tried it. They probably need 10 years of aging.


They have somehow managed to make a monte worse than the regular edmundo? Impressive :hn


----------



## galaga (Sep 18, 2003)

carbonbased_al said:


> They have somehow managed to make a monte worse than the regular edmundo? Impressive :hn


Yerkillingme Smitty, yerkillingme.

:r


----------



## cohibaguy (Feb 22, 2006)

I am amazed that a cigar from Monte can receive such criticizm. I am not exactly a fa of the Edmundo yet I like to have one occasionally. Interesting that the petite one is so much worse than the regular vitola.

Can anyone compare it to the HdM small Robusto?

cohibaguy


----------



## Andyman (Jun 8, 2004)

I hear they are very UN-monte like..


----------



## Tripp (Nov 27, 2006)

Wow, I was thinking of trying to get ahold of a couple of these, but after hearing all this, I don't think it'd be worth the trouble.


----------



## ikwanjin (Dec 28, 2006)

Thanks for the warning..


----------



## LiteHedded (Apr 10, 2005)

Tripp said:


> Wow, I was thinking of trying to get ahold of a couple of these, but after hearing all this, I don't think it'd be worth the trouble.


I was too.
This thread is much appreciated


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

Tripp said:


> Wow, I was thinking of trying to get ahold of a couple of these, but after hearing all this, I don't think it'd be worth the trouble.


I wouldn't freak out just yet guys. I have seen a lot more favorable reviews of these than unfavorable. At least give em a try and make your own decisions.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

cohibaguy said:


> I am amazed that a cigar from Monte can receive such criticizm. I am not exactly a fa of the Edmundo yet I like to have one occasionally. Interesting that the petite one is so much worse than the regular vitola.
> 
> Can anyone compare it to the HdM small Robusto?
> 
> cohibaguy


You also have to remember that the guys giving unfavorable reviews (CigarFlip,ZemekOne,carbonbased_al) are all heavy-hitters in the Habanos world and what they consider unsmokeable noobs might consider pretty decent. Those guys are true connoisseur's of the leaf with palate's that are beyond many people's. I know that they don't smoke stuff less than 5 years old usually so your experience may differ.

Having said that, thanks for letting me know guys... I'll be holding off


----------



## beamish (Jan 10, 2007)

Are You Telling Me The Edmundo Is Bad Also?never Tried Either One But I Love The Number 4 And 2...


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

The Edmundo was a HUGE dissapointment when it was originally released. Just a sub-par smoke at that time. Since the initial release some have started to come around but nothing on par with normal quality Monte's IMO. 

If you have some Edmundo's from the original release on hand they should probably be just starting to get decent but other than that I'd hold off for another 3 years or so.


----------



## LeafHog (Feb 11, 2004)

LasciviousXXX said:


> You also have to remember that the guys giving unfavorable reviews (CigarFlip,ZemekOne,carbonbased_al) are all heavy-hitters in the Habanos world and what they consider unsmokeable noobs might consider pretty decent.


:tpd: I don't have near the palate these guys do, but here's my :2 anyway. I've had several of the original release edmundos and I would consider them a very pedestrian smoke (for a cuban cigar). There are many, many others I would pick up first, but it's not a _bad _smoke. I would expect the Petite E's to be about the same, and require the same aging before they start to come around.


----------



## bpegler (Mar 30, 2006)

LasciviousXXX said:


> The Edmundo was a HUGE dissapointment when it was originally released. Just a sub-par smoke at that time. Since the initial release some have started to come around but nothing on par with normal quality Monte's IMO.
> 
> If you have some Edmundo's from the original release on hand they should probably be just starting to get decent but other than that I'd hold off for another 3 years or so.


Some of the first I smoked had off color greenish discolorations and were not so hot. I tried one more box and they were darker with heavy wrappers. These smoke well now, and I think they will be really outstanding in a couple years. I love Monte's, but have often found incredible swings in their quality.

I wonder if the same will be true of the petite edmundo.

The good ones are worth the trouble IMHO.:ss


----------



## weasel (May 22, 2006)

Well, I bought a box last month.

Haven't tried them, as my experience with Montes is that they can be rough without age on them.
I see no reason why these wouldn't be the same.

I'll consider trying one in a year or so!


----------



## Roosterthomas (Dec 15, 2005)

Just F#@*ing great, I've got a box coming! Dammit, I thought I'd read up on these pretty good and made a good decision.:c Well maybe the Cohiba Siglo I's that are coming will cheer me up.


----------



## burninator (Jul 11, 2006)

Roosterthomas said:


> Just F#@*ing great, I've got a box coming! My first ISOM purchase to boot. Dammit, I thought I'd read up on these pretty good and made a good decision.:c Well maybe the Cohiba Siglo I's that are coming along for the ride will cheer me up.


I wouldn't lose hope. "Bad" cubans have never really been that bad, have they?


----------



## LiteHedded (Apr 10, 2005)

the cohibas are a nice consolation prize


----------



## Even Steven (Dec 15, 2006)

Roosterthomas said:


> Just F#@*ing great, I've got a box coming! My first ISOM purchase to boot. Dammit, I thought I'd read up on these pretty good and made a good decision.:c *Well maybe the Cohiba Siglo I's that are coming along for the ride will cheer me up*.


I bet they will! The day I recieved a 25 ct. box of Cohiba Siglo I's, it made me happier than I already was!


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

Roosterthomas said:


> Just F#@*ing great, I've got a box coming! My first ISOM purchase to boot. Dammit, I thought I'd read up on these pretty good and made a good decision.:c Well maybe the Cohiba Siglo I's that are coming will cheer me up.


I wouldn't worry about it, bad cigars to some poeple on this board are blockbusters to others. Just come to your own conclusion, and if they're you're first ISOM's they're gonna be better than most if not all NC's you have. JMO.


----------



## montecristo#2 (May 29, 2006)

You know what, everyone is different. I actually love the edmundos, granted they are a little mild and do not have the classic monte flavor profile, but I still think they are very good. I am looking forward to eventually trying a petite, however, from what I have seen, they are not that much cheaper than the regular edmundo (haven't looked that hard though). If they are similar to their big brother, I don't see any real reason to get them. 

Not too long ago, people were having a similar discussion about the RyJ short churchills, some people seem to love them while other people can't stand them (I personally like them). Again, these are a pretty mild smoke as well, so if you are used to smoking full-bodied cigars, these may not be right for you.


----------



## Even Steven (Dec 15, 2006)

I'll be happy to take 5 off your hands if you don't like them eehehehehehe


----------



## lenguamor (Nov 23, 2006)

I have a box of 05 Edmundos, and I too was disappointed when I tried one; the strange wrapper doesn't help any visually.

But I've had another since, (over a year ago) and I'm noting some improvement...enough that I'm not concerned long-term about this cigar. It'll be fine. You just need to have patience.


----------



## zemekone (Aug 1, 2004)

i not gonna say they are a DONT BUY... im gonna say they need alot of sleeping time... they taste really young, ive had many young #3, #4, #5 and IMHO they were a lil better than the edmundo...


----------



## gabebdog1 (Mar 9, 2005)

there just not ready for smoking right now, if your gonna buy 1 box and you want to smoke it soon this aint the cigar it tasted like wet newspapaer smells
I also didnt taste that thang that makes ya go in 10 yrs this will rock. so only buy if ya want to take a chance in aging them and thats my :2


----------



## gedmondson (Jan 12, 2006)

LasciviousXXX said:


> You also have to remember that the guys giving unfavorable reviews (CigarFlip,ZemekOne,carbonbased_al) are all heavy-hitters in the Habanos world and what they consider unsmokeable noobs might consider pretty decent. Those guys are true connoisseur's of the leaf with palate's that are beyond many people's. I know that they don't smoke stuff less than 5 years old usually so your experience may differ.


This may just be one of the most ridiculous things I have seen here. Experience does not render one's palate superior. If you enjoy what you are smoking, then that is all that is necessary and it doesn't matter whether it is your first cigar or your 1000th. Being able to define your taste in terms relating to spices and other foodstuffs, leather, dirt or wood may impress some, but I believe it is highly subjective and frankly, worthless. Everyone tastes things differently. It has been demonstrated that an individual's collective memories play the greatest role in how tastes and smells are interpreted.

By the way, go ahead and try the petit Edmundo. They are actually an excellent medium bodied cigar, possessing hints of cafe au lait and bittersweet chocolate with a tangy burnt leaves aroma. Enjoy

Been smoking Habonos for 10 years. You either like the one you just lit, or you don't.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

gedmondson said:


> This may just be one of the most ridiculous things I have seen here. Experience does not render one's palate superior. If you enjoy what you are smoking, then that is all that is necessary and it doesn't matter whether it is your first cigar or your 1000th. Being able to define your taste in terms relating to spices and other foodstuffs, leather, dirt or wood may impress some, but I believe it is highly subjective and frankly, worthless. Everyone tastes things differently. It has been demonstrated that an individual's collective memories play the greatest role in how tastes and smells are interpreted.
> 
> By the way, go ahead and try the petit Edmundo. They are actually an excellent medium bodied cigar, possessing hints of cafe au lait and bittersweet chocolate with a tangy burnt leaves aroma. Enjoy
> 
> Been smoking Habonos for 10 years. You either like the one you just lit, or you don't.


Understandable, and I respect your opinion... I don't think mine is necessarily "ridiculous" but I'll let you have your opinion on that 

I understand that taste is subjective and while that debate has been going round and round for awhile I'm a firm believer that taste is a subjective thing. However, that being said, there are some things in which taste in universal... how does everyone know what an orange tastes like? Does everyone pretty much describe chocolate the same way?? To an extent yes, it all depends on layers and types of flavors recognized.

That being said, YES, I do believe that experience does help define how you recognize flavors in a cigar. Most newcomers to the world of Habanos would not be able to properly appreciate a 1985 RyJ Churchill Tubo in comparison to the last few years vintage of the RyJ as they don't have a lot of experience with aged and vintage cigars. They will definitely taste the difference but how do they define that difference in terms of quality of the RyJ Churchill over the last 20 years? Would they able to do a vertical tasting of the Churchill and detect the changes in crop, curing-process, etc? Or would that type of experience be lost on them and they'll just be able to say "Well, they're good"

While I do think that it takes no experience whatsoever to tell if you enjoy a cigar to say that having experience smoking them is "ridiculous" and "worthless" is not only incorrect but a little wreckless at that. 
:2

XXX

PS - Welcome to ClubStogie!!!


----------



## cigarflip (Jul 4, 2004)

gedmondson said:


> This may just be one of the most ridiculous things I have seen here. Experience does not render one's palate superior. If you enjoy what you are smoking, then that is all that is necessary and it doesn't matter whether it is your first cigar or your 1000th. Being able to define your taste in terms relating to spices and other foodstuffs, leather, dirt or wood may impress some, but I believe it is highly subjective and frankly, worthless. Everyone tastes things differently. It has been demonstrated that an individual's collective memories play the greatest role in how tastes and smells are interpreted.
> 
> By the way, go ahead and try the petit Edmundo. They are actually an excellent medium bodied cigar, possessing hints of cafe au lait and bittersweet chocolate with a tangy burnt leaves aroma. Enjoy
> 
> Been smoking Habonos for 10 years. You either like the one you just lit, or you don't.


I do think I have enough Montecristo cigars to know what the Monte taste is. I've had a few Edmundos and they don't taste like a Monte to me. It might be good for somebody else's palate but definitely not for me.That is the same reaction I have to the Petite Edmundo or the 06 Robusto. BTW, I am not telling anybody to avoid or not smoke these. It is my impression and yours might be completely different from mine.


----------



## gedmondson (Jan 12, 2006)

LasciviousXXX - That was a gracious and reasoned response to my obnoxious post. Thanks for the welcome, and please accept my apology.


----------



## zemekone (Aug 1, 2004)

gedmondson said:


> LasciviousXXX - That was a gracious and reasoned response to my obnoxious post. Thanks for the welcome, and please accept my apology.


i thought that was gonna get ugly WeLcOmE 2 ThE JuNgLe GEDMONDSON!


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

gedmondson said:


> LasciviousXXX - That was a gracious and reasoned response to my obnoxious post. Thanks for the welcome, and please accept my apology.


No need for an apology at all. The Jungle is a large place and many times I run into thoughts and opinions that are different from my own. Some influence me to change my opinions and some don't. Just the way of the world.

Plus it stimulates GREAT conversation 

Again, welcome to the best Community on the net. I look forward to more Habanos conversations.


----------



## Roosterthomas (Dec 15, 2005)

well I feel better now about my greatly anticipated arrivals.
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/Cigar/CA_Features/CA_Feature_Basic_Template/0,2344,1755,00.html


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

I smoked one the other day and found there to be some nice flavors. Nothing spectacular but these need some time. I did find some caramel, and citrus flavors. My only problem is that i'm not sure I really like the size. Not sure that I needed 2 boxes of these however.


----------



## One Lonely Smoker (Jan 21, 2005)

Oh shit, someone puts up the Suckster's opinion and thinks that will make people feel better?? Haha.
Seriously, I still hate the Trinidad Robusto Extra, it's like it's trying to be a Dominican or something. Where is the Cuban flavor? I just don't get that one ewither. I hope the Edmundos are not as bad as all that, fixing to try my first this weekend. Ah, Mardi Gras......it's like going home.


----------



## Roosterthomas (Dec 15, 2005)

One Lonely Smoker said:


> Oh shit, someone puts up the Suckster's opinion and thinks that will make people feel better?? Haha.
> 
> I've got a box coming and it makes ME feel better so don't ruin it!


----------



## PuroRob (Feb 2, 2007)

I recently purchased a box and smoked one OTT. They were extremely tannic...they definitely need 2-3 years age. I feel they will come around, they had an impeccable draw and burn and I felt comfortable with the size....... I will be patient with them.

My expectations were they might have a short window of 3-6 month's of smokeability, similar to the PSD 4 or Boilvar PC. However that is not the case, unless you like extreme an tannic, leathery taste profile.:ss


----------



## carni (Jan 18, 2007)

It appears the going trend with new habanos releases is to give them at* least* a year after box date. Everyone I jhave had and everyone I have heard says they all taste young. The petit robustos from HyM needed it, PSP#2 needed it, Edmundos definately needed it, even some of the EL's need it. If you are going to make the purchase use it as a humi filler, conversation starter, and thread bragger.


----------



## Ermo (Jun 3, 2006)

carni said:


> PSP#2 needed it


I have a box of these from NOV 05 and they still haven't come around.


----------



## Tristan (Jul 11, 2006)

cigarflip said:


> I do think I have enough Montecristo cigars to know what the Monte taste is. I've had a few Edmundos and they don't taste like a Monte to me. It might be good for somebody else's palate but definitely not for me.


I see where you are coming from and agree. If you buy a cigar looking for something specific and it is not there it will be a disappointment even though the cigar may be decent.


----------



## lenguamor (Nov 23, 2006)

Roosterthomas said:


> well I feel better now about my greatly anticipated arrivals.
> http://www.cigaraficionado.com/Cigar/CA_Features/CA_Feature_Basic_Template/0,2344,1755,00.html


I have to say those PE's pictured there look DRASTICALLY different from my 05 Eddie's; the wrapper on the 05's is one of the strangest I've ever seen, very light, almost claro, with greenish parts. The PE's seem dark and rich.

Despite the wrapper though, I think the 05's will be fine; you just have to be patient with them.

Now I'm anxious to try the PE's...(goes to look for a sampler)


----------



## ATLHARP (May 3, 2005)

LasciviousXXX said:


> You also have to remember that the guys giving unfavorable reviews (CigarFlip,ZemekOne,carbonbased_al) are all heavy-hitters in the Habanos world and what they consider unsmokeable noobs might consider pretty decent. Those guys are true connoisseur's of the leaf with palate's that are beyond many people's. I know that they don't smoke stuff less than 5 years old usually so your experience may differ.
> 
> Having said that, thanks for letting me know guys... I'll be holding off


Is that a nice way of calling them snobs?

Anyway, I like the Edmundo and i like the Petite Edmundo. I think they are both great cigars. I think the problem with the Edmundo was that the initial releases were made with less than great tobacco and they came out tasting bland and papery. I had a few from the early days that were downright bad.

The last two boxes of Edmundos I have had are wonderful and smooth as silk. The Petite Edmundo is a different cigar and it's flavor rests somewhere between a Monte 4 and a Monte 1. It is enjoyable and and out of the many I have gifted to family and friends I have yet to find one them that did not give it high marks. Now they are not tremendous connoisseurs with smoking jackets and chateaus in France, but they do know a good cigar. My advice is to buy a couple and let them sit for about a month and try them after dinner. In reality, the only opinion that matters is your own.:2

ATL


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

ATLHARP said:


> It is enjoyable and and out of the many I have gifted to family and friends I have yet to find one them that did not give it high marks. Now they are not tremendous connoisseurs with smoking jackets and chateaus in France, but they do know a good cigar.


I must fall under the "friends" category since I am not family.
I will go ahead and make the Petite Edmundo you gave me last week the order of the day today. I personally agree with you totally on the regular Edmundo. They are now very, very nice cigars. If this is anything like the last Edmundos I had, I know I will enjoy it.

Now, as far as the rest of your statement, "Viva la France"!:fu :r


----------



## cigarflip (Jul 4, 2004)

tristan said:


> I see where you are coming from and agree. If you buy a cigar looking for something specific and it is not there it will be a disappointment even though the cigar may be decent.


On the opposite side of the fence, I am not a big fan of Bolivars. The earthy taste doesn't do it for me. However, when the Colosales came out, I loved them to a point where a cab of 50 is down to some measly sticks. Talked to some Bolivar lovers and they tell me that the Colosales doesn't taste anything like the typical Boli. That's probably the reason I liked them.


----------



## MoTheMan (May 24, 2003)

Just my :2 here.

Got a gifted 3 pack that came in a leather cigar carrying case. Lit one up last night while hanging out with Havanaaddict. Quite enjoyable. All the full character of a Monte 2, perhaps a tad milder. 
Reminded me of the Edmundo, which I got to try from a first release box when they first came out and thought were quite good. Subsequent Edmundos I've had have ALL been disappointing. :fu 
Maybe its the first release (of the MC PE) that made this cigar so tasty?, Maybe it's a good cigar overall? Maybe it was the fact that it's been sitting in a leather pouch? Who knows, but I like the MC PE. :w 
I personally don't think that the MC brand is nearly as good (i.e. tasty, complex, oomph!) as it was some 12-15 years ago, but still has many fave sticks for me.


----------



## Ivory Tower (Nov 18, 2005)

gedmondson said:


> an individual's collective memories play the greatest role in how tastes and smells are interpreted.


I understand the spirit of what you're saying, gedmonson. And I think that XXX is simply pointing out that their are several other people here that qualify for "experienced" (with cigars), under the above-quoted phrase. So, it doesn't seem ridiculous that those with a of memories of the RyJ [x-- or whatever] from year [y-z] would be unsuited to base their opinion of another particular cigar on such "experience."

That aside, I can't tell from this thread what the verdict is on the MCPE!!!:cb 
And I'm not getting any so I can make my own mind up!


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

MoTheMan said:


> Just my :2 here.
> 
> Got a gifted 3 pack that came in a leather cigar carrying case. Lit one up last night while hanging out with Havanaaddict. Quite enjoyable. All the full character of a Monte 2, perhaps a tad milder.
> Reminded me of the Edmundo, which I got to try from a first release box when they first came out and thought were quite good. Subsequent Edmundos I've had have ALL been disappointing. :fu
> ...


I have smoked a few more of these lately and they just get better and better. I'm glad I saved the second box, and I am starting to regret selling the first one. Very nice flavor, and very smooth. These seem to be much better than HDM PR. Nice full bodied smoke.


----------



## ATLHARP (May 3, 2005)

Sandman said:


> I have smoked a few more of these lately and they just get better and better. I'm glad I saved the second box, and I am starting to regret selling the first one. Very nice flavor, and very smooth. These seem to be much better than HDM PR. Nice full bodied smoke.


That was my sentiments exactly. When I smoked one OTT it was quite underwhelming but after some quality humi time they perked right up. The last two I smoked from the box were stellar! I do agree they tend to have a bit better flavor than Hoyo PR.:2

My only gripe with Monte PE is that the value (quality to dollar ratio) doesn't really match up. I think it's a bit overpriced compared to other sticks that are just as good and 20 bucks cheaper.
ATL


----------



## Sandman (Mar 26, 2006)

ATLHARP said:


> That was my sentiments exactly. When I smoked one OTT it was quite underwhelming but after some quality humi time they perked right up. The last two I smoked from the box were stellar! I do agree they tend to have a bit better flavor than Hoyo PR.:2
> 
> My only gripe with Monte PE is that the value (quality to dollar ratio) doesn't really match up. I think it's a bit overpriced compared to other sticks that are just as good and 20 bucks cheaper.
> ATL


Agreed, I like them, but I do feel they are way overpriced.


----------

